Should we use rats in experiments? No. Do we need to use rats in experiments? Yes.

As things stand, we have no choice but to use rats (and dogs and monkeys) as test subjects in some areas of research. Progress is being made in replacing living subjects with 'in vitro' substitutes, and no doubt that work will continue and fewer animals will have to suffer in the future.

I would not claim that today no animals suffer in experiments that are not really justified, but the trend is definitely away from live experimentation. In the UK, animal experimentation is strictly controlled by law, specifically the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, which requires experiments are justified and cause the minimum of suffering. AFAIK, institutions involved in animal experimentation are more happy than to work within and even exeed the requirements of the act.

Everyone - especially the scientists involved - hopes that animal experimentation can be replaced by in vitro substitutes one day, but until then the best we can do is ensure it is regulated to minimise suffering - which is already happening, although of course it is not happening fast enough to satisfy everyone.

At 10/11/2015 12:10:03 PM, logical-master123 wrote:Please give some arguments by saying your position and argument. :

You mean genus Rattus, our not so distant ancestors? Well back in the 30's and 40's Hitler, his scientists and the entire German race thought it was a very good idea. They claim that huge advancements in understanding Evolution-story have been made in a short time during WWII experimenting on a larger form of rats; genus Jew-Rattus, so I guess it would be a total waste to incinerate 6 million genus Ratus without having experimented on them first.

My position, .. depends on three things, it's which perspective I take; is it from an Evolutionary-science perspective (which is very dofferent from normal science) where I am an animal of the ape family "binomial nomenclature" whose not-so distant cousins included rats, or choose a side of my parents ideology to speak from; dad who was a Hungarian Nazi and believed whites, specifically German/Hungarian at the time were not part of this evolving ape of Homo Sapiens,(See picture in this article)

but have come from other systems like Anaheim, planets like Asgard, and got stuck on this planet and eventually mixed in with the animals which eventually evolved apes, some which even resemble real non-animal Humans. Some evolve so close to real humans that few years back, Germans had to do some DNA testing in New York on whiter-skinned, some even blond and blue-eyed Italian Americans and Jews, but the DNA samples proved these white blond-blue eyed Italians and Jews were still of the ape/rat family. You cannot fool German Evolutionary biologist, they are always on the lookout for unusual phenomena, like the Blue Brain Project and the hundreds of other associated projects on homo Sapiens whether or not they could actually evolve a mind of their own like Real-Humans, or Illuminatus-Superius .. as we rats call them.

From the Evolutionary perspective, we are all animals (except of course as I mentioned the superior race the Illuminatus-Superius), us homo sapiens eat other animals even of the same species. Apes, monkeys sometimes hunt and eat other monkeys, the homo-erectus also kill and eat (more specifically children's hearts and drink their blood) other homo-erectuses. So experimenting before consuming or exterminating is obviously both rational and beneficial - (that would be from my dads Superior-Evolutionary perspective.)

Mom was a Jewess, so of course didn't want to accept that she is a descendent of rats, so she wouldn't vote for lab-rats, she lost too many family members to such studies, .. go figure!? I guess some people just can't accept who they are, and the overall benefits on allowing yourself to be experimented on. Have you guys seen the plethora of complaints on the internet against Chem-Trailing, and GMO foods, and the different experiments that are being done in cows and their milk that we rats are being fed with? I say they are just anti-white, anti- Superior Race conspiracy theorists with their tin-foil hats.Not to worry though, because these 'products of evolution' have already accepted their place on the evolutionary ladder, so most are Django's, the backbone of brute force protecting and enforcing the Illuminatus-Superius cause. They are in the army, navy, Special Forces, Chem-trail pilots, nurses in cancer centers etc. and are ready and willing both to kill their own, or die for the cause. They somehow understand their "Final Solution", and even do the Kali dance of death in preparation for the "Final Solution!":https://www.youtube.com...

You know, in a way it would be so much easier to die being tortured through experimentation knowing it is to benefit the real humans, so when the Big-ship comes to pick them up, they can take all this knowledge back to Asgard, and all those other systems with them!? Most likely they will meet Marshal Applewhite and his space-crew on their way out of our solar system and pick them up too!?

That's MHO on lab-rats, and being one I know what I'm talking about.

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau

At 10/11/2015 12:10:03 PM, logical-master123 wrote:Please give some arguments by saying your position and argument.

Humanity can be cruel, but nature is horrific. As a baseline moral comparison, in the wild, most individuals do not die of old age, but of predation, disease and starvation. Nature has killed off 99% of every terrestrial species that ever existed, including at least one other abstracting-thinking, tool-using hominin likely with language, and almost certainly with compassion and grief -- the Neanderthals.

Nature itself has neither compassion nor morality, and our species has no special security on this planet. What we don't know not only can kill us, that likelihood only grows with time.

However...

Alone of any terrestrial species, humanity is capable of extending compassion toward every creature with a nervous system (and some without), of nurturing them, creating space for them, and cherishing them -- and potentially, of preserving their species indefinitely from death and extinction, if we can also do the same for ourselves.

But we are alone in this venture, and ignorant. Good wishes achieve nothing. We cannot progress without biological, biochemical, and medical knowledge, and cannot rely on what may occur if we do not gather it.

Historically, the strategic scientific benefits from animal testing have been major, in human medicine but also allied life sciences such as biology and veterinary science, while the cost of scientific ignorance is often appalling. Yet, as other members have argued, if we can learn without animal testing, we should. To this end, many scientific peak bodies are committed to the 'three Rs' principles of:

There are review bodies in many jurisdictions charged with the responsibility of monitoring animal testing protocols as part of broader scientific ethical reviews, and in leading jurisdictions such as the UK, the proportion of research funding spent on animal research has diminished over time.

It would be ideal to have so much knowledge and such a strong suite of alternative testing techniques that science could do without animal testing, but scientifically, I do not believe we are there yet.

Moreover, animal testing controls can only be managed jurisdictionally, and I think attempts to ban animal testing in some jurisdictions run the risk of displacing tests to jurisdictions with weaker controls. This is an area I think we need to coordinate and improve incrementally, rather than fractionalise.

So, should we have less animal testing? Always.Should we ban it? Not yet.

At 10/11/2015 12:10:03 PM, logical-master123 wrote:Please give some arguments by saying your position and argument. :

You mean genus Rattus, our not so distant ancestors? Well back in the 30's and 40's Hitler, his scientists and the entire German race thought it was a very good idea. They claim that huge advancements in understanding Evolution-story have been made in a short time during WWII experimenting on a larger form of rats; genus Jew-Rattus, so I guess it would be a total waste to incinerate 6 million genus Ratus without having experimented on them first.

My position, .. depends on three things, it's which perspective I take; is it from an Evolutionary-science perspective (which is very dofferent from normal science) where I am an animal of the ape family "binomial nomenclature" whose not-so distant cousins included rats, or choose a side of my parents ideology to speak from; dad who was a Hungarian Nazi and believed whites, specifically German/Hungarian at the time were not part of this evolving ape of Homo Sapiens,(See picture in this article)

but have come from other systems like Anaheim, planets like Asgard, and got stuck on this planet and eventually mixed in with the animals which eventually evolved apes, some which even resemble real non-animal Humans. Some evolve so close to real humans that few years back, Germans had to do some DNA testing in New York on whiter-skinned, some even blond and blue-eyed Italian Americans and Jews, but the DNA samples proved these white blond-blue eyed Italians and Jews were still of the ape/rat family. You cannot fool German Evolutionary biologist, they are always on the lookout for unusual phenomena, like the Blue Brain Project and the hundreds of other associated projects on homo Sapiens whether or not they could actually evolve a mind of their own like Real-Humans, or Illuminatus-Superius .. as we rats call them.

From the Evolutionary perspective, we are all animals (except of course as I mentioned the superior race the Illuminatus-Superius), us homo sapiens eat other animals even of the same species. Apes, monkeys sometimes hunt and eat other monkeys, the homo-erectus also kill and eat (more specifically children's hearts and drink their blood) other homo-erectuses. So experimenting before consuming or exterminating is obviously both rational and beneficial - (that would be from my dads Superior-Evolutionary perspective.)

Mom was a Jewess, so of course didn't want to accept that she is a descendent of rats, so she wouldn't vote for lab-rats, she lost too many family members to such studies, .. go figure!? I guess some people just can't accept who they are, and the overall benefits on allowing yourself to be experimented on. Have you guys seen the plethora of complaints on the internet against Chem-Trailing, and GMO foods, and the different experiments that are being done in cows and their milk that we rats are being fed with? I say they are just anti-white, anti- Superior Race conspiracy theorists with their tin-foil hats.Not to worry though, because these 'products of evolution' have already accepted their place on the evolutionary ladder, so most are Django's, the backbone of brute force protecting and enforcing the Illuminatus-Superius cause. They are in the army, navy, Special Forces, Chem-trail pilots, nurses in cancer centers etc. and are ready and willing both to kill their own, or die for the cause. They somehow understand their "Final Solution", and even do the Kali dance of death in preparation for the "Final Solution!":https://www.youtube.com...

You know, in a way it would be so much easier to die being tortured through experimentation knowing it is to benefit the real humans, so when the Big-ship comes to pick them up, they can take all this knowledge back to Asgard, and all those other systems with them!? Most likely they will meet Marshal Applewhite and his space-crew on their way out of our solar system and pick them up too!?

That's MHO on lab-rats, and being one I know what I'm talking about.

Sweety, apes are not a family, and species are written in this fashion Idiotis inferior, not Idiotis Inferior, Idiotis-inferior, and so on.

What? How dare you say that, don't let Creaser "green eyes" hear you say 'apes are not a family'! And if you have watched all those nature scientific documentaries like "Planet of the Apes, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, " you would know how upset the 'family' could get!

and species are written in this fashion Idiotis inferior, not Idiotis Inferior, Idiotis-inferior, and so on. :

I was talking about Idiotis Inferior, a completely different species than your Idiotis inferior, .. I have both fossils right here next to my weegie board and a cup-o blood, .. lol.

Don't you just love talking religious-sci-fi?

Take care Otokage.

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau

What? How dare you say that, don't let Creaser "green eyes" hear you say 'apes are not a family'! And if you have watched all those nature scientific documentaries like "Planet of the Apes, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, " you would know how upset the 'family' could get!

Oh hahahah true, true, my bad.

and species are written in this fashion Idiotis inferior, not Idiotis Inferior, Idiotis-inferior, and so on. :

I was talking about Idiotis Inferior, a completely different species than your Idiotis inferior, .. I have both fossils right here next to my weegie board and a cup-o blood, .. lol.

At 10/11/2015 12:10:03 PM, logical-master123 wrote:Please give some arguments by saying your position and argument.

Humanity can be cruel, but nature is horrific. As a baseline moral comparison, in the wild, most individuals do not die of old age, but of predation, disease and starvation. Nature has killed off 99% of every terrestrial species that ever existed, including at least one other abstracting-thinking, tool-using hominin likely with language, and almost certainly with compassion and grief -- the Neanderthals.

Wow, .. Evolutionists got to be the most two faced people on the face of the earth, and the most arrogant. Not only do they preach/teach to us and our children that we are animals, but actually expect us to think like them.Your Mama Nature supposedly created 100% of life on earth, and you going to tell us that she kills 99% before old age does? Do the math Mr. scientist, throw a few meteors into that 99% and there wouldn't be any life passed your single celled bacteria, not another of your 4.2 billion years, and the actual beauty in nature, and the abundance of life that we now have. But yes, radiation and chem-trailing is having a major extinction effect, thanks to Evolutionists and their forced mutation.

Oh don't you just love those Key-Words like; "Neanderthal", you just got to mention that in your preaching don't you? Gatta keep us animals thinking like animals, .. lol.

Nature itself has neither compassion nor morality, and our species has no special security on this planet. What we don't know not only can kill us, that likelihood only grows with time.

Yes, and after 4.2 billion years The National Science Foundation's "Tree of Life" project estimates that there could be anywhere from 5 million to 100 million species on the planet, but science has only identified about 2 million. Aug 3, 2007. So yes, human study shows that we must kill all the human animals (Agenda 21) so there would be room for more animals (Georgia Guide stones). So it's not Gods nature that has no compassion, but theses skull & bones worshipping Evolutionists that chem-trail every living thing on the face of the earth, including themselves (Heavens Gate agenda on a world wide scale)

However...

Alone of any terrestrial species, humanity is capable of extending compassion toward every creature with a nervous system (and some without), of nurturing them, creating space for them, and cherishing them -- and potentially, of preserving their species indefinitely from death and extinction, if we can also do the same for ourselves.

Aaahh.. Eternal Life for everyone, is that it? That's why Agenda 21 and the associated agendas/plans for the extermination of 6.5 billion Homo-animals were done in secret. Strictly for compassionate reasons, .. lol.

But we are alone in this venture, and ignorant. Good wishes achieve nothing. We cannot progress without biological, biochemical, and medical knowledge, and cannot rely on what may occur if we do not gather it.

Yes, hurry, hurry, Mother Nature can only evolve 2 to 10 million species, the rest is up to the Homo-ape animals Intelligent Design, otherwise Mother Nature will kill 99%!! .. lol, unbelievable.

Historically, the strategic scientific benefits from animal testing have been major, in human medicine but also allied life sciences such as biology and veterinary science, while the cost of scientific ignorance is often appalling. :

Yes I agree that "scientific ignorance" is appalling, especially the way Evolutionists represent science, .. truly appalling. And remember people, we are all animals, so this included the testing done on Jews during WWII, and now the entire planet is an experimental testing ground.

Yet, as other members have argued, if we can learn without animal testing, we should. To this end, many scientific peak bodies are committed to the 'three Rs' principles of:

* Reduction of animal testing; :

What a lie, it now includes the entire planet.

* Refinement of tests to minimise harm, discomfort and suffering and :

Bull, .. refinement as to making it unnoticeable, like spraying nano-particles over our heads, causing discomfort like itching from rashes, and unimaginable suffering from all kinds of cancers.

* Replacement of animal testing wherever feasible.

Like what, testing on robots? Do you know of something else than animals to test on? Remember folks, humans are animals in the eyes of Evolutionists!

There are review bodies in many jurisdictions charged with the responsibility of monitoring animal testing protocols as part of broader scientific ethical reviews, and in leading jurisdictions such as the UK, the proportion of research funding spent on animal research has diminished over time.

Another lie, billions are spent a DAY in chem-trailing over the entire world. Gotta hurry, time is short, Jesus is coming so we must not let Him find any life on earth.

It would be ideal to have so much knowledge and such a strong suite of alternative testing techniques that science could do without animal testing, but scientifically, I do not believe we are there yet.

Not yet, there are still animals left alive. So TEST, .. TEST, .. TEST! Pour more radioactive water into the oceans from Fukushima, you'll get there!

Moreover, animal testing controls can only be managed jurisdictionally, and I think attempts to ban animal testing in some jurisdictions run the risk of displacing tests to jurisdictions with weaker controls. This is an area I think we need to coordinate and improve incrementally, rather than fractionalise.

Which jurisdiction has such incredible power to ban chem-trailing, or deny the ocean currents to deliver the floating radiation? That's why we have the Black-Ops no?

So, should we have less animal testing? Always.Should we ban it? Not yet. :

My God, .. just look up in the sky people, does that show less animal and biological life testing?Nice sermon RuvDraba. But please let's be more realistic here, the truth is that the whole Earth is the lab, and we are the rats, .. just ask Richard Dawkins.

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau

Yes. A lot of the hoopla against lab rats has to do with the fact that we have stamped out most diseases. These diseases are gone so the fear is gone. Bring the diseases back and everyone will be begging or lab rats again.If you're spouse, or child, or parent was dying of cancer but you knew that a cure could be found by testing on lab rats, would you do it? I think anyone who wouldn't is insane. Either that or they enjoy seeing their loved one in pain.Right now we have rats in war torn countries who are trained to look for old land mines. You know what happens when they do find the mines, right?These rats are saving many young children from having their arms or legs blown off, since it is usually children who find the mines by stepping on them when they are out playing.

At 10/25/2015 8:43:54 PM, j50wells wrote:Yes. A lot of the hoopla against lab rats has to do with the fact that we have stamped out most diseases. These diseases are gone so the fear is gone. Bring the diseases back and everyone will be begging or lab rats again.If you're spouse, or child, or parent was dying of cancer but you knew that a cure could be found by testing on lab rats, would you do it? I think anyone who wouldn't is insane. Either that or they enjoy seeing their loved one in pain.Right now we have rats in war torn countries who are trained to look for old land mines. You know what happens when they do find the mines, right?These rats are saving many young children from having their arms or legs blown off, since it is usually children who find the mines by stepping on them when they are out playing. :

Do you believe we are the result of purposeless evolution that didn't have us in mind? Cancer is a form of mutation, and trying to wipe mutation off the face of the earth (cure cancer) goes right against Mother Natures Evolution. Why is it that this human-monkey always tries to either go against, or help mother nature (evolution) out all the time? Evolutionists know that mutation, and causing mutation through disease is the only way they can 'prove' evolution is real, so they advertise false-flag "You Have Cancer" advertisements to inject people with radiation and all kinds of deadly chemicals to push for that next speciation, that next split, and wait in anticipation for a new human species to pop up!

According to Evolution, isn't finding cure the first step in stopping evolution, so what is this lab-rat experiment thing anyways? Don't they know what could happen when they directly interfere with evolution like that? Just imagine how many 'Elephant-man' species they may have wiped out in the name of 'finding cures' for diseases!??

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau